I don't have much experience with unions, so what would be the advantage of doing this? I read that it would not allow the owners to have a lockout, but wouldn't it still give more power back to the owners?

_________________I was at this casino minding my own business, and this guy came up to me and said, "You're gonna have to move, you're blocking a fire exit." As though if there was a fire, I wasn't gonna run. If you're flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit

September 12th, 2010, 10:22 am

Wayne Fontes

Color Commentator - John Madden

Joined: January 19th, 2007, 3:21 amPosts: 1919Location: A2

Re: NFLPA exploring Decertification

From what I understand is that if the NFLPA is decertified as a union then the players themselves could file anti-trust lawsuits against the NFL and it's owners. I don't knowt he legal-ese behind this move, but it seems to be the players best option to get what they want.

NFLPA decertification vote could ensure NFL football in 2011Posted by Mike Florio on September 11, 2010 3:51 PM ET

With fans celebrating the return of the NFL season, the NFLPA is providing us all with regular reminders that the league and the players are on a collision course for a potential work stoppage.

But the news this time is good, at least for the fans.

The union believes that the owners will lock the players out and/or unilaterally impose the league's last, best offer as new work rules. And so the NFLPA reportedly is laying the foundation for a move that would set the stage for another class-action antitrust lawsuit, and that necessarily would allow football to continue, while the lawyers clean up all details.

Liz Mullen of SportsBusiness Journal reports that all players will be asked to vote to authorize decertification. Chris Mortensen of ESPN reports that the Saints already have voted unanimously to allow decertification.

Decertification would be used either to block a lockout or to combat the unilateral imposition of work rules by the league. Put simply, if the NFLPA decertifies, the league would then be required to promulgate player acquisition and retention rules on an across-the-board basis. The union then would sue the league, arguing that the imposition of standard rules regarding player acquisition and retention among 32 different businesses constitutes a violation of antitrust laws.

The union applied the same approach after the failed strike of 1987. And the union's ability to at least attempt the move was validated by the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling earlier this year in the American Needle case. Though the lengthy written opinion of the Court contains language suggesting that the NFL could defeat an antritust challenge in the context of labor relations, the outcome preserves the ability of the union to pursue the antitrust route.

Still, the move likely would prevent a work stoppage. And if the NFL were to attack the move by calling it a sham (Mullen points out the league has done this before), it would be very easy for the union to point out to the fans that they are doing everything they can to ensure that football will continue -- and that the NFL is trying to take it away.

Either way, as we get ready to enjoy Week One of the 2010 regular season, this development encourages us that there will be a Week One in 2011.

Basically, this is just a legal move that would play out in the courts.

It would also allow the NFLPA to create a new union. As the NFL PA, they can only negotiate with the NFL. Now, if they were to create,say, the Association of Professional Football Players for example. They could then negotiate with any football league on behalf of their membership.

So, they could represent Arena, Canadian FL, and UFL players also. And even use one league against the other in negotiations.